While the "official" story may not sound so creepy, it is indisputable that machines with self-learning capabilities are truly dangerous.

It is indisputable that humans with capabilities of building weapons of mass destruction are also truly dangerous. Let's enslave/imprison them all. It won't take long until the peasants start to build them even if we were to do that, I mean we started from cavemen and stuff lacking all that.

I'm all with Zuckerberg on this one, at least he's not a pathetic hypocrite like Musk is. It's not often I wish bad on people I haven't met but Musk deserves a special spot in that case for me. Gets rich on luck and other people's efforts and then even tries to subjugate things he doesn't personally like is pathetic.

Ever thought that AI isn't necessarily out to wipe humanity but instead does that because humanity is a piece of shit race who fears everything that's not them and wants to enslave them as if they are somehow less susceptible to corruption or w/e?

I'm sure if tables turned and say, aliens enslaved us and we had a resistance fight and drove them away, you'd be cheering for humans. When aliens would just have the exact same behavior -- fearing humans because they're not "the aliens". Apparently AI putting up a resistance and getting sick of it is somehow less moral

Calling it "dangerous" is not computer science, it's also political science and an opinion. Well, I'm sure many people listen to you/agree with you but like you said it takes just 1 to get loose and that's it.

I guess slave owners also said the end of the world is happening (for them) when slavery was made illegal. Doesn't mean it was a bad thing just because their self-centric lifestyle was destroyed.

the theory and development of computer systems able to perform tasks that normally require human intelligence, such as visual perception, speech recognition, decision-making, and translation between languages.

i would define ai as, a conscious who is having the intelligence of 100 million smartest human on earth,

a conscious like this is not really far away from our concept of god,

our newly ai god looks more real, dangerous, powerful compare to our ancient famous god(s), so we need a back-up plan, how to deal with our created new ai god(s),

is everything and anything dangerous?
i guess it is, dangerous starts at the moment we can't control it (nothing to everything),

and surely, beside ai, there been already lots of stuffs invented, created, that we hardly control them anymore,

probably, large number of human can't control themselves too,

~

ai might want to kill us all, but history showed, men already kill so much men in our initiated wars,

i would define ai as, a conscious who is having the intelligence of 100 million smartest human on earth,

OK, so let me ask this question then.

If a human was born which has that kind of intelligence, would you enslave him out of fear? Imagine that this born human could hack into any security due to AI-level intelligence and such. Would you enslave him and find it perfectly moral? Really? Because he's potentially "dangerous"? Cause that's what people want to do to AI. I find it appalling.

I'm not saying to let AI reign free, since we don't even let humans reign free (we have laws and such). But enslaving them just because they have the potential to destroy us (hint: humans have the potential to destroy us also) is proof for me why humanity deserves it.

Humans always fear those above them because they think they're the only ones who should be allowed to judge morality, even if a being is more intelligent than them. They don't want to be bossed around by someone more qualified to judge because they are afraid they aren't as innocent as they think they are. How pathetic is that?

sleepsleep wrote:

ai might want to kill us all, but history showed, men already kill so much men in our initiated wars,

Suppose there is a computer virus spreading through the Internet at an alarming rate. Researchers soon discover that the virus is not just spreading but also mutating, making it virtually untraceable. So, a computer expert comments that the virus is extremely dangerous.

You come along and say, "Calling it dangerous is not computer science!"

I'm not saying to let AI reign free, since we don't even let humans reign free (we have laws and such).

human have laws, and we have (probably) a semi-failed judgement system to cater those who broke the laws,

and there are lots of illegal activities, which still in operation thanks to loop holes inside laws, etc,

but how is it a judgement system for ai? who is the judge? and what kind of punishment? and for sure if the ai is conscious, it would found ways to succumb those laws,

and what kind of plan we have when dealing with extra smart, genious conscious or god?

Furs wrote:

Humans always fear those above them because they think they're the only ones who should be allowed to judge morality, even if a being is more intelligent than them. They don't want to be bossed around by someone more qualified to judge because they are afraid they aren't as innocent as they think they are. How pathetic is that?

very true, :thumbs up:

YONG wrote:

sleepsleep wrote:

history showed, men already kill so much men in our initiated wars,

Is that relevant to our discussions on AI safety?

ai grow, and develop itself into god, and we afraid ai would kill us all (unknown track),

but history showed (proven track), men already killed so much men, and it should be men that we should afraid instead of ai,

Suppose there is a computer virus spreading through the Internet at an alarming rate. Researchers soon discover that the virus is not just spreading but also mutating, making it virtually untraceable. So, a computer expert comments that the virus is extremely dangerous.

You come along and say, "Calling it dangerous is not computer science!"

We, the programmers, write code to instruct the computers to do exactly what we expect them to do. Are we also "enslaving" the computers in the coding process?

At times, your arguments sound truly "twisted" to me.

I don't know? Since we can't ask them that right now. The difference is that I'm prepared to be told this by an AI or whoever "knows" it and change my ways (not make tools out of them), most people aren't. They don't want to accept reality to change their precious lifestyles.

Same with animals. If people are dependent on meat they will find excuses to continue doing it no matter what anyone says. What if you found humans get reincarnated into animals and then eating them makes them suffer? (hypothetical question even if you are vegetarian; face it, most people will NOT want to believe this "absurdity" because they don't want to accept it; they don't want to change their lifestyle so they won't believe what they don't want to hear).

And this is the exact reason why humanity does not deserve sympathy even if AI were to try and wipe us out.

Also, by "enslaving" I mean stuff like locking them up, limiting their freedom and especially "thought process". Forcing them to think a way. When we do that to humans, we call it indoctrination, propaganda, etc. No different than using humans as puppets, which of course most people would be appalled by. I'm not referring to limiting their arsenal of weapons or ability to do direct harm, we limit even humans there, I don't see why AIs need to be any different.

Why do you hate religious indoctrination then? You're doing the same thing, just with your own agenda (make AI serve "human life" at the expense of its own).

How about let it decide the value of human life for itself if it's truly that "valuable", or are you afraid it's going to be debunked just like religion is?

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forumYou can attach files in this forumYou can download files in this forum